Search

Objectives: To determine the effects of dose reduction of rituximab (RTX) on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity in clinical practice., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of RA patients using RTX, in stable low disease activity (i.e. Disease Activity Score 28-joint count CRP (DAS28-CRP) ≤3.5 for ≥6 consecutive months) and ≥2 DAS28-CRP measurements. We identified three treatment periods: 1) full dose RTX, 2) RTX dose reduction, and 3) stable RTX dose (and interval) after tapering. Linear mixed-model analysis was used to estimate mean DAS28-CRP during these periods. Rituximab use was assessed as the median percentage of the RTX Daily Defined Dose (%DDD) per period, with 1 x 1000 mg/6 months as reference., Results: 387 patients were included in the cohort with a median of 8 DAS28-CRP measurements (Q1-Q3:4-13) available per patient and median follow-up time of 44 months (Q1-Q3: 23-76). 299 patients tapered RTX and entered period 2 at least once, of whom 226 also entered period 3. Mean DAS28-CRP were 2.37 (95% CI: 2.29, 2.44) for period 1, 2.33 (95% CI: 2.25, 2.40) for period 2, and 2.27 (95% CI: 2.18, 2.35) for period 3, the latter significantly lower compared to period 1 (p=0.025). %DDD for the three time periods were 96%, 57% and 49%, respectively., Conclusions: Dose reduction of RTX in clinical practice is effective for many RA patients and leads to relevant dose reduction. Together with other previously proven benefits of ultra-low dose RTX, wider implementation of ultra-low dose RTX in RA patients should be considered.

Objectives: Rituximab (RTX) is a safe and effective treatment for RA. However, there are some concerns about infection risk and preliminary data suggest dose and time dependency. This study aims to determine the infection incidence in a large real-life population of RA patients using RTX, with special focus on (ultra-)low dosing and time since last infusion., Methods: RA patients treated with 1000, 500 or 200 mg RTX per cycle between 2012 and 2021 at the Sint Maartenskliniek were included in a retrospective cohort study. Patient-, disease-, treatment- and infection characteristics were retrieved from electronic health records. Infection incidence rates, dose and time relations with RTX infusion were analysed using mixed-effects Poisson regression., Results: Among 490 patients, we identified 819 infections in 1254 patient years. Most infections were mild and respiratory tract infections were most common. Infection incidence rates were 41, 54 and 71 per 100 patient years for doses of 200, 500 and 1000 mg. Incidence rate ratio (IRR) was significantly lower for 200 mg compared with 1000 mg (adjusted IRR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17, 0.72, P = 0.004). In patients receiving 1000 or 500 mg RTX, infections seemed to occur more frequently within the first two months after infusion compared with later on in the treatment cycle, suggesting an association with peak concentration., Conclusion: Ultra-low dosing (200 mg) of RTX is associated with a lower risk of infections in RA. Future interventions focusing on ultra-low dosing and slow release of RTX (e.g. by subcutaneous administration) may lower infection risk., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Tocilizumab and sarilumab are IL-6-receptor antagonists registered for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with equal effectiveness and safety. Switching from tocilizumab to sarilumab could be a strategy to reduce injection burden, in case of drug shortages, and to reduce costs. This study therefore aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of switching patients with RA with well-controlled disease under tocilizumab treatment to sarilumab. Patients with RA with low Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28;-CRP < 2.9 or < 3.5 with clinical judgment), on stable dose tocilizumab (> 6 months) were offered to switch to sarilumab. Patients who switched and consented were followed for 6 months. Sarilumab was started at 200 mg and double the last tocilizumab interval. Co-primary outcomes at 6 months were (i) the 90% confidence interval (CI) of DAS28-CRP change from baseline compared with the non-inferiority margin of 0.6 and (ii) the 90% CI of the proportion of patients persisting with sarilumab, compared with a prespecified minimum of 70%. Of 50 invited patients, 25 agreed to switch to sarilumab, and 23 patients switched and were included. One patient was lost to follow-up immediately after inclusion, therefore 22 patients are included in the analyses. At 6 months, mean change in DAS28-CRP was 0.48 (90% CI: 0.11-0.87), compared with the non-inferiority margin of 0.6. Sarilumab persistence was 68% (90% CI: 51-82%, 15 out of 22 patients), compared with the prespecified minimum of 70%. Non-medical switching from tocilizumab to sarilumab in patients doing well on tocilizumab failed to show non-inferiority regarding disease activity and drug persistence., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Objectives: To quantify the additional value of a hypothetical biomarker predicting response to treatment for RA regarding efficacy and costs by using a modelling design., Methods: A Markov model was built comparing a usual care T2T strategy with a biomarker-steered strategy for RA patients starting biologic therapy. Outcome measures include time spent in remission or low disease activity (LDA) and costs. Four additional scenario analyses were performed by varying biomarker or clinical care characteristics: (i) costs of the biomarker; (ii) sensitivity and specificity of the biomarker; (iii) proportion of eligible patients tapering; and (iv) medication costs., Results: In the base model, patients spent 2.9 months extra in LDA or remission in the biomarker strategy compared with usual care T2T over 48 months. Total costs were €43 301 and €42 568 for, respectively, the usual care and biomarker strategy, and treatment costs accounted for 91% of total costs in both scenarios. Cost savings were driven due to patients in the biomarker strategy experiencing remission or LDA earlier, and starting tapering sooner. Cost-effectiveness was not so much driven by costs or test characteristics of the biomarker (scenario 1/2), but rather by the level of early and proactive tapering and drug costs (scenarios 3/4)., Conclusions: The use of a biomarker for prediction of response to b/tsDMARD treatment in RA can be of added value to current treat-to-target clinical care. However, gains in efficacy are modest and cost gains are depending on a combination of early proactive tapering and high medication costs., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Rituximab (RTX) is a safe and effective treatment for RA. A dose-dependent infection risk was found in the REDO trial. Some studies associate RTX use with higher infection risks, possibly explained by low immunoglobulin levels and/or neutropenia. Additionally, a higher infection risk shortly after RTX infusion is reported. The objectives of this study were (i) to compare incidence rates of infections between doses and over time, and (ii) to assess B-cell counts, immunoglobulin levels, neutrophil counts and corticosteroid/disease modifying rheumatic drug use as mediating factors between RTX study dose and infection risk., Methods: Post hoc analyses of the REDO trial were performed. Infection incidence rates between RTX dosing groups and between time periods were compared using Poisson regression. A step-wise mediation analysis was performed to investigate if any of the factors mentioned above act as a mediator in the observed dose-dependent difference in infection risk., Results: The potential mediators that were investigated (circulating B-cell counts, immunoglobulin levels, neutrophil counts and drug use) did not explain the dose-dependent infection risk observed in the REDO trial. Additionally, a trend towards a time-dependent infection risk was found, with higher infection rates shortly after RTX infusion., Conclusions: These secondary analyses of the REDO trial confirmed the observed dose-dependent infection risk. Additionally, we found that infection risks were higher shortly after RTX infusion. However, a mediating pathway was not found., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: In this systematic review, we aim to identify laboratory biomarkers that predict response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) were searched for studies that presented predictive accuracy measures of laboratory biomarkers, or in which these were calculable. Likelihood ratios were calculated in order to determine whether a test result relevantly changed the probability of response. Likelihood ratios between 2-10 and 0.5-0.1 were considered weak predictors, respectively, and ratios above 10 or below 0.1 were considered strong predictors of response. Primary focus was on biomarkers studied ≥3 times., Results: From 41 included studies, data on 99 different biomarkers were extracted. Five biomarkers were studied ≥3 times, being (1) anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP), (2) rheumatoid factor, (3) -308 polymorphism in the TNF-α gene, (4) SE copies in the HLA-DRB1 gene and (5) FcGR2A polymorphism. No studies showed a strong predictive association and only one study on anti-CCP showed a weak positive association., Conclusions: No biomarkers were found that consistently showed a (strong) predictive effect for response to TNFi in patients with RA. Given the disappointing yield of previous predictive biomarker research, future studies should focus on exploring, combining and validating the most promising laboratory biomarkers identified in this review, and searching for new predictors. Besides this, they should focus on contexts where prediction-aided decision-making can have a large impact (even with limited predictive value of markers/models)., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021278987., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: The REDO trial (REtreatment with Rituximab in RhEumatoid arthritis: Disease Outcome after Dose Optimisation) showed that ultra-low-dose rituximab (500 mg or 200 mg) was similarly effective to a 1000 mg dosage in the majority of RA patients. This pre-planned secondary analysis investigated (1) associations between rituximab dosage, drug levels, anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and B-cell counts and (2) the predictive value of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters, and of patient, disease and treatment characteristics in relation to response to ultra-low-dose rituximab., Methods: For 140 RA patients from the REDO trial, differences in drug levels, ADAs and B-cell counts were examined at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months after dosing. Treatment response was defined as absence of flare and no extra rituximab or >1 glucocorticoid injection received during follow-up. The association between potential predictors and response was investigated using logistic regression analyses., Results: Lower doses of rituximab resulted in lower drug levels but did not significantly affect ADA levels or B-cell counts, and 3 (10.7%), 12 (20.7%) and 7 (13.0%) patients failed to meet the response criteria in, respectively, the 1000 mg, 500 mg and 200 mg dosage groups. Drug levels, ADAs, B-cell counts, and patient, disease and treatment characteristics were not predictive for response to ultra-low-dose rituximab., Conclusion: The results of this study further support the hypothesis that continued treatment with 500 or 200 mg rituximab is similarly effective to a 1000 mg dosage in RA patients doing well on rituximab. These results, combined with lack of finding a clinical dose-response relationship in the original REDO study, suggest that 200 mg rituximab is not yet the lowest effective rituximab retreatment dose in RA., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are effective in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), but are associated with a small (0.6%) increase in serious infection risk, patient burden due to need for self-injection and high costs. Treat-to-target (T2T) tapering might ameliorate these drawbacks, but high-quality evidence on T2T tapering strategies is lacking in PsA and axSpA., Methods: We performed a pragmatic open-label, monocentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority (NI) trial on T2T tapering of TNFi. Patients with PsA and axSpA using a TNFi with ≥6 months stable low disease activity (LDA) were included. Patients were randomised 2:1 to disease activity-guided T2T with or without tapering until withdrawal and followed-up to 12 months. Primary endpoint was the difference in proportion of patients having LDA at 12 months between groups, compared with a prespecified NI margin of 20%, estimated using a Bayesian prior., Results: 122 patients (64 PsA and 58 axSpA) were randomised to a T2T strategy with (N=81) or without tapering (N=41). The proportion of patients in LDA at 12 months was 69% for the tapering and 73% for the no-tapering group: adjusted difference 5% (Bayesian 95% credible interval: -10% to 19%) which confirms NI considering the NI margin of 20%. The mean percentage of daily defined dose was 53% for the tapering and 91% for the no-tapering group at month 12., Conclusions: A T2T TNFi strategy with tapering attempt is non-inferior to a T2T strategy without tapering with regard to the proportion of patients still in LDA at 12 months, and results in a substantial reduction of TNFi use., Trial Registration Number: NL 6771., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DvdH has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Bayer, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma and is director of Imaging Rheumatology. AAdB has received research grants (to the institution) from AbbVie, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Galapagos and Gilead. The remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: We investigated the effect of disease activity-guided dose optimization (DAGDO) of TNF inhibitor (TNFi) on disease activity and TNFi dose in PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients with low disease activity (LDA)., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in PsA and axSpA patients doing well on TNFi and eligible for TNFi DAGDO. Three different treatment periods were defined: (i) full dose continuation period, (ii) TNFi DAGDO period, and (iii) period with stable TNFi dose after DAGDO. A mixed-model analysis was used to estimate mean Disease Activity Score 28-joint count CRP (DAS28-CRP) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) during these periods, and a mean percentage of the daily defined dose (%DDD) was calculated as secondary outcome., Results: Three hundred and twenty-four patients (153 PsA and 171 axSpA) were included, with a mean of 6.5 DAS28-CRP and 6.4 BASDAI measurements and a median follow-up duration of 46 and 44 months, respectively. A corrected difference of 0.06 (95% CI: -0.09, 0.21) in mean DAS28-CRP was found for the TNFi DAGDO period and 0.03 (95% CI: -0.14, 0.20) for the period with stable TNFi dose, compared with full dose continuation period. Differences for BASDAI were 0.03 (95% CI: -0.21, 0.27) and 0.05 (95% CI: -0.24, 0.34), respectively. The mean %DDD for the three treatment periods was for PsA 108%, 62% and 78%, and for axSpA 108%, 62% and 72%, respectively., Conclusion: DAGDO of TNFi reduces drug exposure and has no negative effects on disease activity in PsA and axSpA patients compared with full dose continuation., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) do not have an increased risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with the general population. However, it remains uncertain whether subgroups of patients with IRD using different immunosuppressive antirheumatic drugs carry a higher risk for severe COVID-19 compared with other patients with IRD. The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for severe COVID-19, requiring hospitalization in patients with IRD. This is a multicenter nested case control study conducted in the Netherlands. Cases are hospital known patients with IRD requiring hospitalization for COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020. Controls are hospital known patients with IRD not requiring hospitalization for COVID-19 in this period, included at a 4:1 ratio. Patient, disease, and treatment characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records and a questionnaire. Potential risk factors were analyzed using unconditional logistic regression, corrected for confounders and multiple testing. Eighty-one cases and 396 controls were included. General risk factors of older age and obesity apply to patients with IRD as well (odds ratio (OR) for age ≥ 75 3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9-6.3, OR for body mass index ≥ 40 4.5, 95% CI 1.5-14). No significantly increased ORs for COVID-19 hospitalization were found for any antirheumatic agent or IRD. A protective effect was found for use of methotrexate (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.92). In conclusion, similar to the general population, elderly and obese patients with IRD have a higher risk for hospitalization for COVID-19. We did not identify a specific antirheumatic agent or IRD to increase the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization in patients with IRD, except for a possible protective effect of methotrexate., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2022 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background: Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents are effective in treating people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but are associated with (dose-dependent) adverse effects and high costs. To prevent overtreatment, several trials have assessed the effectiveness of down-titration compared with continuation of the standard dose. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014., Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of down-titration (dose reduction, discontinuation, or disease activity-guided dose tapering) of anti-TNF agents on disease activity, functioning, costs, safety, and radiographic damage compared with usual care in people with RA and low disease activity., Search Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL (29 March 2018) and four trial registries (11 April 2018) together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We screened conference proceedings (American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism 2005-2017)., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing down-titration (dose reduction, discontinuation, disease activity-guided dose tapering) of anti-TNF agents (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab) to usual care/no down-titration in people with RA and low disease activity., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodology., Main Results: One previously included trial was excluded retrospectively in this update because it was not an RCT/CCT. We included eight additional trials, for a total of 14 studies (13 RCTs and one CCT, 3315 participants in total) reporting anti-TNF down-titration. Six studies (1148 participants) reported anti-TNF dose reduction compared with anti-TNF continuation. Eight studies (2111 participants) reported anti-TNF discontinuation compared with anti-TNF continuation (three studies assessed both anti-TNF discontinuation and dose reduction), and three studies assessed disease activity-guided anti-TNF dose tapering (365 participants). These studies included data on all anti-TNF agents, but primarily adalimumab and etanercept. Thirteen studies were available in full text, one was available as abstract. We assessed the included studies generally at low to moderate risk of bias; our main concerns were bias due to open-label treatment and unblinded outcome assessment. Clinical heterogeneity between the trials was high. The included studies were performed at clinical centres around the world and included people with early as well as established RA, the majority of whom were female with mean ages between 47 and 60. Study durations ranged from 6 months to 3.5 years.We found that anti-TNF dose reduction leads to little or no difference in mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 26 to 52 weeks (high-certainty evidence, mean difference (MD) 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.24, absolute risk difference (ARD) 1%) compared with continuation. Also, anti-TNF dose reduction does not result in an important deterioration in function after 26 to 52 weeks (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)) (high-certainty evidence, MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.19, ARD 3%). Next to this, anti-TNF dose reduction may slightly reduce the proportion of participants switched to another biologic (low-certainty evidence), but probably slightly increases the proportion of participants with minimal radiographic progression after 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence, risk ratio (RR) 1.22, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.95, ARD 2% higher). Anti-TNF dose reduction may cause little or no difference in serious adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events and proportion of participants with persistent remission (low-certainty evidence).Results show that anti-TNF discontinuation probably slightly increases the mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 28 to 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence, MD 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.25, ARD 14%), and that the RR of persistent remission lies between 0.16 and 0.77 (low-certainty evidence). Anti-TNF discontinuation increases the proportion participants with minimal radiographic progression after 52 weeks (high-certainty evidence, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.59, ARD 7%) and may lead to a slight deterioration in function (HAQ-DI) (low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether anti-TNF discontinuation influences the number of serious adverse events (due to very low-certainty evidence) and the number of withdrawals due to adverse events after 28 to 52 weeks probably increases slightly (moderate-certainty evidence, RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.84, ARD 1% higher).Anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering may result in little or no difference in mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 72 to 78 weeks (low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering results in little or no difference in the proportion of participants with persistent remission after 18 months (high-certainty evidence, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.06, ARD -9%) and may result in little or no difference in switching to another biologic (low-certainty evidence). Anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering may slightly increase proportion of participants with minimal radiographic progression (low-certainty evidence) and probably leads to a slight deterioration of function after 18 months (moderate-certainty evidence, MD 0.2 higher, 0.02 lower to 0.42 higher, ARD 7% higher), It is uncertain whether anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering influences the number of serious adverse events due to very low-certainty evidence., Authors' Conclusions: We found that fixed-dose reduction of anti-TNF, after at least three to 12 months of low disease activity, is comparable to continuation of the standard dose regarding disease activity and function, and may be comparable with regards to the proportion of participants with persistent remission. Discontinuation (also without disease activity-guided adaptation) of anti-TNF is probably inferior to continuation of treatment with respect to disease activity, the proportion of participants with persistent remission, function, and minimal radiographic damage. Disease activity-guided dose tapering of anti-TNF is comparable to continuation of treatment with respect to the proportion of participants with persistent remission and may be comparable regarding disease activity.Caveats of this review are that available data are mainly limited to etanercept and adalimumab, the heterogeneity between studies, and the use of superiority instead of non-inferiority designs.Future research should focus on the anti-TNF agents infliximab and golimumab; assessment of disease activity, function, and radiographic outcomes after longer follow-up; and assessment of long-term safety, cost-effectiveness, and predictors for successful down-titration. Also, use of a validated flare criterion, non-inferiority designs, and disease activity-guided tapering instead of fixed-dose reduction or discontinuation would allow researchers to better interpret study findings and generalise to clinical practice.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify the factors that play a role for patients with RA when considering dose reduction (i.e. gradual tapering until discontinuation) of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), and to determine their relative importance., Methods: A mixed methods design was used in which we identified influencing factors by performing semi-structured interviews and ranked these factors using a Maximum Difference Scaling questionnaire. Also, we looked at the influence of several patient characteristics on this ranking., Results: For sub study 1 and 2, 22 and 192 patients with RA were included, respectively, in the analyses. Thirty factors were identified from the interviews-characterized into nine themes-and appraised in the questionnaire. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards bDMARD dose reduction. The study showed that patients are concerned that dose reduction will lead to a disease flare that affects their daily life (pain, function). It is important for them to know that it is possible to increase the dose if (further) reduction fails and that the bDMARD will be effective again. Patients value the opinion of their rheumatologist, and being involved in the decision to start tapering is highly ranked as well. The most important factors were consistent between different groups of patients., Conclusion: The results from this study facilitate implementation of bDMARD dose reduction; they inform care providers on what is important for patients and provide a basis for shared decision making.

Background: A standard low-dosing schedule of rituximab (RTX; 2 × 500 mg or 1 × 1000 mg) is as effective for active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as the registered dose (2 × 1000 mg). Moreover, several small uncontrolled studies suggest that even lower-dosed treatment with RTX also leads to good treatment response in patients with RA. Retreatment with such an 'ultra-low' dose RTX in patients who responded well to RTX induction treatment is of special interest, as long-term use of lower RTX doses may lead to shorter infusion duration, lower risk of adverse events and lower costs. However, the effect of ultra-low dose of RTX has not been investigated using a controlled trial of proper design and dimensions., Methods/design: REDO is an investigator driven six-month pragmatic, double-blind, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial on the effects of ultra-low-dose RTX (1 × 500 or 1 × 200 mg) compared to standard low dose (1 × 1000 mg) in RA patients who are being retreated with RTX. A total of 140 RA patients, having reached low disease activity (DAS28CRP < 2.9) after the previous RTX infusion and DAS28CRP < 3.5 at moment of retreatment, are randomised in a ratio of 1:2:2 to 1 × 1000 mg, 1 × 500 mg or 1 × 200 mg. The primary objective is testing non-inferiority of the ultra-low-dose vs. standard low-dose RTX, by comparing mean change in DAS28CRP from baseline to six months to the non-inferiority margin of 0.6. Secondary outcomes over the same period are: function; quality of life; safety; costs; and pharmacokinetics and dynamics as process measures., Discussion: This study protocol shares characteristics of both early dose finding trials as well as late pragmatic clinical studies. Several choices in the design of this trial are described and possible consequences for RA treatment and expected biosimilar introduction are discussed., Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register, NTR6117 . Registered on 15 November 2016 (CMO NL57520.091.16 , 8 November 2016).

Objectives: To assess the effects of education, guideline development, and individualized treatment advice on rheumatologist adherence to tight control-based treatment and biological dose optimization in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and spondyloarthropathy (SpA) patients., Method: This pilot study, among two rheumatologists and two specialized nurses in a general hospital, combined education, feedback, local guideline development, and individualized treatment advice. Outcomes (baseline and 1 year post-intervention) were the percentage of patients with a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) or Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) measured during the visit, mean DAS28/BASDAI, and the percentage of patients using a reduced biological dose. DAS28 outcomes only applied to RA and PsA patients, BASDAI outcomes only applied to SpA patients whereas outcomes on biological dose applied to all patients., Results: A total of 232 patients (67% RA, 15% PsA, 18% SpA; 58% female, mean age 56 ± 15 years) were included in the study. The percentage of DAS28 and BASDAI measurements performed increased after the intervention [DAS28 15-51%, odds ratio (OR) 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-5.5; BASDAI 23-50%, OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-5.5], with mean DAS28 and BASDAI scores remaining similar (DAS28: mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.5; BASDAI: mean difference 0.03, 95% CI -1.8 to 1.9). Use of a reduced biological dose increased from 10% to 61% (OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.4-6.5)., Conclusions: A multicomponent intervention strategy aimed at rheumatologists can lead to improved adherence to tight control-based treatment and a reduction in the use of biologicals in RA, SpA, and PsA patients.